Opinion Pick 3 Versus Picks 12 & 14

[HavUEvaSeenTheRain]

it’s a good thread and we should do it every year for every pick as it will be great to look back on in the future.

I would’ve kept 12 and 14.

I would’ve traded 12 to North but it’s hard to say what else they would’ve wanted. I would’ve then drafted who was left out of Berry and Allan with our next pick.
if we held the picks I would’ve drafted Berry and Trainor. Trainor is a difficult one though, if I had more information on his head knocks then maybe I wouldn’t consider him at all and then I’d take Hannaford.

At 3 I would’ve taken Draper but I wouldn’t lose a seconds sleep about us taking Jagga.

 

[Malifice]

While I would have been all over Hotton, Travaglia or Tauru with any of our original picks, they were all off the board by the time our 'pick 12' would have gotten called, so it's probably Bo Allan and Berry for mine.

Allan is a type we don't have (a midfielder/ defender, with plenty of mongrel and athleticism) and Berry fits the mold for that third goal scoring option that we (still) lack.

Would I trade Smith for both of them? At this stage it's a firm 'No' so I'm happy we did the trade with WCE.

 

[SurreyBlue]

Happy to hand you the shovel, mate

West Coast live-traded 15 (originally 12) to Port.
Richmond traded 14 (became 17) to Freo in their Bolton deal.

Just to add to the discussion and nothing more - doesn't say we would have traded these picks.
I would say anyone from the before the live trades are valid for discussion.

 

[Stamos]

Beveridge said on Gettable he thinks we would have taken Berry at 12(15) if we didn’t get the trade for 3

 

[Blue__Balls]

Just to add to the discussion and nothing more - doesn't say we would have traded these picks.
I would say anyone from the before the live trades are valid for discussion.

For sure - but the picks we started with ended up landing at 15 and 17. They were the 12th and 14th "live pick" for those who like that terminology, with Ashcroft, Lombard and Kako the restricted players who we didn't have access to. Joe Berry was the 12th "live pick" player selected, so if we're playing the "who would you have taken" game then nobody whose name was called prior to Berry at 15 is on the table.

People are of course welcome to spitball trades they'd have done instead, but that's a very vague way to approach it given we have no idea if the other club would have accepted a proposed deal (ie. "I'd have traded 14 for 18 and 22" or some such is great in theory, but it's less relevant than naming the players you'd take with picks that we have all the available names for).

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Looking forward to this thread becoming even more totally meaningless in the years ahead

What’s done is done

It's really just a time capsule. Hopefully, it is more about posters quoting their old self and lamenting how they got it wrong, rather than posters gloating or calling each other in a mean-spirited way.

I don't mind people calling their shot now, rather than claim something later that they didn't say at the time.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Owies was a salary dump, became steak knives, wouldn't assign any value.

Owies was a list position, and an acknowledgement that change was needed.

It's one of those rare situations where a player who has contributed a lot that season, may have played a part in 'gumming up the works'. Great positional player. Accurate kick within 35m. Not a rover, not quick, not dynamic, but taking up one of the 3 spots we have for small/medium players in that forward line. Potentially added to the clutter and kicked goals because the opposition weren't worried about him.

I digress though. Back to the Pick vs 12 and 14 debate.

 

[AT97]

Beveridge said on Gettable he thinks we would have taken Berry at 12(15) if we didn’t get the trade for 3

Twomey also said smith was our number 1 (justifying what we gave up to get 3) and it sounded as if Langford would have been our next pick (if he wasn’t there)…interestingly thought Draper may have been available for st. Blunda’s first pick had Adelaide not taken him.

 

[bradfisher14]

Beveridge said on Gettable he thinks we would have taken Berry at 12(15) if we didn’t get the trade for 3

I always knew WalshistheGOAT was Riley Beveridge's bigfooty account

 

[GoBlues!]

Owies was a list position, and an acknowledgement that change was needed.

It's one of those rare situations where a player who has contributed a lot that season, may have played a part in 'gumming up the works'. Great positional player. Accurate kick within 35m. Not a rover, not quick, not dynamic, but taking up one of the 3 spots we have for small/medium players in that forward line. Potentially added to the clutter and kicked goals because the opposition weren't worried about him.

I digress though. Back to the Pick vs 12 and 14 debate.

Owies, unfortunately the victim of too many small/med forwards competing for limited spots.

Assuming there are 3 spots for small/medium players I would expect Williams is no.1 choice and I have high hopes for Motlop to make it. As for Durdin or Fogarty, I’m not so sure about.

Would like to see Jagga zipping around the forward line stoppages, think he could provide a real point of difference as an attacking forward and a very good distributor to set up any of our other forwards .

 

[lukep_86]

I'm far from being a draft watcher, nor do I have an in depth knowledge of the kids in this year's pool but from everything I read and saw, there was a clear top 5 in this draft. Stoked with Jagga and would have been over the moon with any of the top 5. Props to Austin and Co. for getting pick 3.

Loved watching his highlights and that a lot of the top end talent say that Smith is a massive ball magnet, can't beat the opinions of those he played against. Can't wait to see what he can do next year and beyond.

 

[Opium]

Twomey also said smith was our number 1 (justifying what we gave up to get 3) and it sounded as if Langford would have been our next pick (if he wasn’t there)…interestingly thought Draper may have been available for st. Blunda’s first pick had Adelaide not taken him.

Confirmed Smith was our number one target all along. Langford next.

https://www.afl.com.au/news/1260258

 

[Juice030103]

Gimme Jagga over the other 2 you wanna name


Kids gonna be the captain of the club one day and I’d say good chance to be a 300 gamer

 

[Robertio]

Smith over 12 & 14 every day of the week, fill our team with the best talent is a path to 17.